Holm v. Kodat
This case presents question as to whether trial court properly granted plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgment in action for declaratory relief by plaintiffs-owners of property abutting Mazon River, requesting declaration that plaintiffs’ right of access was to whole of Mazon River, such that plaintiffs could kayak past defendants’ properties that also abutted Mazon Rover free from any trespass claims made by defendants. Trial court based its ruling on fact that plaintiffs could not use surface of Mazon River on portion of River that ran adjacent to defendants’ properties because River was non-navigable waterway at said properties. Appellate Court affirmed trial court, after finding that public easement did not exist to allow public navigation on non-navigable portions of Mazon River. As such, where River was not navigable, riparian owner of each individual parcel of private property situated along River may lawfully bar access to River within their easily ascertainable property lines to any person, including their riparian neighbors.